How Many people, at a Minimum, would it take to carry 9/11 Inside job?

what about it? ... a sincere truth seeker would reply upon youtube vids from pseudo scientists trying to make a buck off a tragic day ...

but, you know, "crushing proof" and all that ...

 

Look in the mirror Shiner, it's easier than posting.

NIST knows what didn't happen and I'm sure they have a really good idea what did happen. Their engineers are brighter than you are. That's why they created (or were directed to create) a fake report.

That's not even remotely true as the evidence clearly proves. The FOIA evidence shows they failed to use their own information at their disposal and made things up to try to support their theory. Although they claim it's a "probable collapse initiation" theory, they publicly peddled it as fact ("WTC7 collapsed primarily due to fire" - Shyam Sunder). He didn't prefix his claim with "we believe" or "our theory is that". "The obvious stares you in the face" - Shyam Sunder is not a claim compatible with a theory.

There's no point in asking you anything, you have nothing to offer. Almost every time I've ever asked you a question, you change the subject because you don't have the stones to confront reality even when you read the details. Stick to your "hobby", it's a really worthwhile endeavor for your type of mentality. I'm not interested, I'll just pick out the lies and correct them as I see fit.

 

The viewers who click on the link and look at the post can see that you're tap dancing around the question instead of addressing it. Please address it. Your credibility is on the line here.

 

0

A truther questioning someone else's credibility is a joke that writes itself.

 

...said the guy who made this lame reply.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=21&p=1066968363#post1066968363

You can pretend all you want but you're all washed up in the eyes of objective people who take the time to click on the link and see how you responded to my post. You destroyed your credibility with that reply.

 

Until you guys provide a competing alternative, you'll always be the losers everyone thinks you are. Sleep tight.

 

You're side stepping the issue and trying to muddy the waters to confuse the viewers who tuned in late. You destroyed your credibility with that lame response.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=20&p=1066965812#post1066965812
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=21&p=1066968363#post1066968363

You ain't no truth-seeker. Your behavior is that of a sophist.

 

Have you answered the OP yet Scott? ...

 

We've given the competing alternative--the truth--and you're rather nervous about that.

Any curious soul that is literate can determine the alternative story with a certain amount of reading and research. Most already have, and know they were deceived on that day.

- - - Updated - - -

We've given the competing alternative--the truth--and you're rather nervous about that.

Any curious soul that is literate can determine the alternative story with a certain amount of reading and research. Most already have, and know they were deceived on that day.

 

Yes.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=12&p=1066772020#post1066772020
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=7&p=1066752675#post1066752675

 

Thats Terrific.

Now be a good boy and cut and paste it here for us to all read.

Whats that? You mean it’s not written anywhere in the world?

Figures…more lies.

 

You're trying to mislead the viewers who tuned in late. It's been posted I don't know how many times.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=456423&p=1066183060#post1066183060

 

Do you have the ability to speak for yourself or do you rely on links for everything? ... that must make for difficult dinner conversation ...

 

That link is a collection of other people's research. I'm not in a position to do research as I work full-time and I'm not an expert who's really competent to do research but I can understand other people's research. I could summarize it for you but what would the point of that be? The info is there. It doesn't matter who came up with it. In your response you're basically just trying to sidestep the issue because that info has you checkmated. You can pretend all you want.

 

Are you going to call out the others that are supposedly doing this Scott? You said this previously:

Eleuthera says this:

So is Eleuthera misleading people? Are you saying that Eleuthera is a government shill/agent and not a real truther? Just curious if you're going to call EVERYONE out based on your past posts or since all truthers consider supporters of the "official story" a common enemy, are you going to let it slide?

 

I might as well say it. I've been wondering about him.

http://www.whale.to/b/sweeney.html
(excerpt)
-----------------------------------------------------
4) Teamwork. They tend to operate in self-congratulatory and complementary packs or teams. Of course, this can happen naturally in any public forum, but there will likely be an ongoing pattern of frequent exchanges of this sort where professionals are involved. Sometimes one of the players will infiltrate the opponent camp to become a source for straw man or other tactics designed to dilute opponent presentation strength.

 

no truther nonsense has me checkmated Scott ...

the answer to the OP would be thousands upon thousands for all the different ridiculous theories being floated in this section ... then if we add in all the "shills" and "disinfo agents" , that number keeps climbing ... and of course the media has to be in on it ... you know, the BBC report and all that ...

still no whistle blowers ... funny that huh? ...

 

No none.

https://www.corbettreport.com/articles/20100305_911_whistleblowers.htm

And not Susan Lindauer or John Kiriakou either. They don't exist, that is a back slapper, isn't it?

 

yeah, seen that before Bob ... all about the Saudis and possible coverup of funding ... still waiting on people who actually in on the plot ... you know, the explosives experts, the guys who planted the light poles, the guys who planted airplane parts, the guys who disposed of the passengers and airliners that went missing that day, the guys who made the hole in Pennsylvania, the firefighters that worked for Chief Nigro who decided to "pull" WTC 7 ... etc ...

I will entertain Saudi involvement if that's the direction you want to go ...

 

You keep pretending that this isn't info there.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=12&p=1066772020#post1066772020

That's what sophists do when they're checkmated.

I'm sure you've seen this before too.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=9/11+witnesses+mysterious+deaths


You Black Knights will never recognize that you're beaten no matter how obvious it is.

Black Knight Scene - Monty Python and the Holy Grail
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RG1P8MQS1cU

 

So then if you did you just had to lie.

 

no Bob, I've seen your nonsense about whistle blowers, most of whom are low ranking kooks ...

and as far as your "witnesses" ... far more support the OTC than do your wacky theory that the gubmint pulled this off ... I linked to a site awhile back about the many firefighters that saw WTC leaning, bulging, creaking and groaning with massive fires etc ... you choose to ignore those over your cherry picked witnesses ... confirmation bias much? ...

 

It isn't MY nonsense, I have nothing to do with whistle blowers or their accounts. You're ALWAYS redirecting all facts that I post and try to make it about me. But the fact remains that since you admit to knowing about these whistle blowers, you lied when you said there were none.

Of course, everyone and everything that disagrees with the OCT is a "low ranking kook". Name calling is always one of the tools you use to support your arguments. Junior high school stuff Shiner, time to grow up.

Again, they are not MINE, I don't own them. Nothing they said/say has anything to do with me.

It doesn't matter how many eyewitnesses support the OCT or what the proportion is (in your opinion), the fact remains that there are many that make it questionable or contradict it. And it doesn't change the fact that there are several whistle blowers who have made public statements despite that you want to dismiss all of them as "low ranking kooks" (as opposed to high ranking pathological liars who peddle the OCT?). There can be 10,000 eyewitnesses who unanimously support a claim and they can all be wrong. You are not making any logical points.

Look in the mirror Shiner. You should try it before you accuse other posters of what you constantly do.

 

It strengthens the physical evidence.

The traffic light poles were knocked down. Five of them. One hit a cab. No truther wants to discuss why the planners would risk someone seeing these mysterious operatives planting the light poles, cab, and have a cabbie involved who they would presumably have to pay hush money to for the rest of his life (along with the operatives to plant the light poles). Why would the planners do that? Its not an argument that is ambiguous…we know the poles and the cab are there and they have to be accounted for. So please Bob…account for them!!!!

The DNA found at the Pentagon matches the passengers. Again, it was either on the plane that hit the Pentagon (the light poles prove it was a plane, not a missile or a bomb) or someone had to plant it there. If you say AA77 didn’t hit the Pentagon, you have to account for how it got there or why people said it was there. So the planners, again, enlarge the circle of persons who were in on it by having someone plant the DNA or someone—dozens of someones—lie about matching it to existing DNA supplied by the families. The physical evidence has to be account for. So, Bob, Account for it!!!

The wreckage at the Pentagon is 100% consistent with an American Airlines jet. If you don’t think and American Airlines jet hit the Pentagon, you have to account for it. So the circle is once again enlarged to have people planting the wreckage inside and outside of the Pentagon without anyone seeing anything. Again, why would the planners go through the risk and trouble of having planters when they could have just taken the plane they hijacked and crashed it into the building?

Renee May, a flight attendant on AA77 called her parents who, in turn, called American Airlines. Something had to prompt the family to call American Airlines. This is physical evidence that needs to be accounted for; So , Bob; Account for it? Now if you believe the phone calls were faked as many truthers do…why would the planners have staged any phone calls at all? Just put into the “official story” that the pilot turned off the phones??? Seems easier (and cheaper) than staging phone calls—one of whom left a combination to a safe for her loved ones to use to access her papers.

Honestly..eye witness accounts are sketchy when you’re talking about 500mph aircraft 15 years ago. Physical evidence needs explanations. The Truthers are afraid to account for any of it.

 

Pay attention Bob ... the whistle blowers that you cite played no part in some cover up of a grand conspiracy ... and don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about ...

and yes, this is partly about you because you don't want to discuss what really happened on 9/11, but rather peddle your anti-government biased bull(*)(*)(*)(*) without addressing concrete facts that only a fool would believe has an alternate explanation ... and please stop with the sophist, cognitive dissonant, shill, OTC defender bull(*)(*)(*)(*) as well ...

I have read the reports and watched plenty of unconvincing Youtube videos over the years to come to a sane, rational conclusion of what happened that day ... I don't have a horse in the race like you ... but party on Bob ... you amuse me ...